Affordances and use plans: An analysis of two alternatives to function-based design

Function-based design approaches have been criticized for being too narrow to properly guide design. Specifically, they are said to be unable to cope with nonfunctional considerations, such as cost or maintenance issues without invoking other concepts, such as constraints. This paper investigates tw...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inAI EDAM Vol. 29; no. 3; pp. 239 - 247
Main Author Pols, Auke J.K.
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published New York, USA Cambridge University Press 01.08.2015
Subjects
Artificial intelligence
Design
Design engineering
Engineering
Engineering design
Expert systems
Maintenance
Special Issue Articles
Strength
Function
Philosophy of Design
Use Plans
Affordances
Online AccessGet full text
ISSN0890-0604
1469-1760
DOI10.1017/S0890060415000268

Cover

More Information
Summary:Function-based design approaches have been criticized for being too narrow to properly guide design. Specifically, they are said to be unable to cope with nonfunctional considerations, such as cost or maintenance issues without invoking other concepts, such as constraints. This paper investigates two alternative conceptualizations of the design process: the practical affordance-based design approach, as elaborated by Maier and Fadel, and the more theoretical use plan approach by Houkes and Vermaas. This paper compares function-, affordance-, and use plan-based design approaches. It highlights strengths and weaknesses of each approach and proposes a definition of the function of an artifact in terms of its affordances.
Bibliography:SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-1
content type line 14
ObjectType-Article-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:0890-0604
1469-1760
DOI:10.1017/S0890060415000268